Middle East predicament back to square one

By Jim Anderson

WASHINGTON (DPA): The Middle East crisis is spreading again militarily, politically, economically and psychologically.

Despite attentive American diplomatic intervention by U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell, the initiative has again moved to the streets, where Palestinians and Israelis continue to shoot it out, adding to the 600-plus deaths and thousands of injuries that have been recorded since the current Intifada began 10 months ago.

Departing U.S. Ambassador to Israel Martin Indyk, a passionate supporter of the peace process that began in Oslo in 1993, has now declared that initiative dead.

He blamed the Palestinian leadership for failing to halt the street violence, in an interview with the right-wing Jerusalem Post. But, in a part of the interview that was not printed by the newspaper, he also blamed the Israeli government for continuing its provocative expansion of Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank and Gaza.

The latest escalation flared across the Israeli-Lebanese border, raising the prospect that street violence in Israel and the occupied territories may become spread into regional crisis. The United States, the European Union and Russia sent their envoys to Lebanon this week in the wake of an Israeli air raid on Syrian targets in eastern Lebanon to try to keep the lid on.

The possibility of renewed fighting between Syria and Israel has now been added to the explosive equation in the Middle East.

But, in fact, the crisis has already moved through the region, with the United States coming under verbal attack from Arab governments for tilting toward Israel and for failing to use its influence on the Israeli government to diminish the violence.

In Washington, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and U.S. President George W. Bush openly disagreed, with Sharon insisting on a total end to violence before resuming any negotiations with the Palestinians. Bush and Powell, recognizing that the Palestinian leadership has less than absolute control on the ground, said that Sharon should recognize a 100 percent effort by the Palestinians and not insist on miracles.

A similar conversation took place between Sharon and French and German leaders this week in Paris and Berlin, suggesting that Sharon's hard-line policies are eroding Israel's usual support among western governments, including the usually automatic pro- Israeli response from Washington.

Psychologically, opinion polls in Israel and the Palestinian territories show that those who believe there can be a peaceful solution are in diminishing minorities. That has had a devastating impact on the Palestinian and Israeli economies.

Tourism, once a major source of income for both sides, has practically disappeared. Investment has dwindled and even the blossoming Israeli dot-com industry has begun to slow down.

It was only a year ago that the Israelis and Palestinians met with President Bill Clinton at Camp David, and coming tantalizingly close to an agreement that would have set a course for a final settlement of territorial issues. At the last minute, Palestinian Authority President Yasser Arafat pulled back, fearing that concessions on core issues such as the return of refugees would undermine his government.

Nobody in Washington, Europe or the Middle East is even suggesting a return to that formula.

Too much blood has since been shed. There are now new scores to settle; minds are set on vengeance, not the hope of living peacefully as two peoples, side by side.

The American policy seems to be peace by exhaustion -- let the two sides fight it out until they run out of energy or anger. But that has never worked in the Middle East.

The pattern has always been escalation of violence until it threatens American interests, followed by direct U.S intervention, usually diplomatic, leading to armed truce.

This time, with the Bush administration's reluctance to take the lead role, it appears that the most likely outcome would be a combined American-European Middle East initiative.

But such a delicate diplomatic effort will require time and a shift in the Bush administration's attitude about getting involved in the Middle East.